A subject that is not often discussed outside of grad student circles, but the pressure to develop many different skills at once, and execute them at a consistently high level, makes academic research a much less glamorous gig than watching Neil Tyson or Bill Nye may suggest.
The title of this post was not unprovoked. It’s a direct response to statements made at a small public gathering by pastor and student of theology Andrew Pitts, of Antioch Church LA. I’m a bit late getting around to this, but the message is too important to let it fall through the cracks. I (evolutionary biologist) co-wrote this with my girlfriend (science historian – @deetronic), who is posting it on her own blog as well.
A couple of weeks ago we were invited to attend what was called a “debate” at a church near the UCLA campus. This debate, which was actually a presentation of two stand-alone 20-minute talks, was called “The Conflict,” and described as “[t]wo opposing views on God and Science meet up to debate whether there is a conflict.” Pastor of Antioch LA, Andrew Pitts (organizer) represented the view that there was no opposition between God and Science. Colleague and friend of ours, Anthony Friscia, a UCLA faculty member in the Department of Integrative Biology and Physiology, represented the view that Science cannot support the existence of God.
Perhaps we were naïve to think this would be a lively, rational conversation. Even before walking inside, we were greeted on the sidewalk by two friendly college students who asked, “Are you here for the debate? It’s against the biologists!” It was amusing to see them stare awkwardly when one of us answered, “We’re biologists!” But in retrospect this was an obvious indication that we were not walking into an honest discussion of conflicting worldviews. When Pitts started his talk, it was immediately clear that the event was intended to bring a scientist into a church meeting to somehow lend credibility to what amounted to pseudoscience, insisting that there is more scientific support for theism than for atheism and then attacking atheists for lack of morality.
It’s not often that scientists address the topic of intelligent design (ID). Despite the way it is presented, there is absolutely no science behind it. It’s simply a futile effort by creationists to discredit the overwhelming evidence supporting evolution by common descent, because these facts are inconvenient for religious fundamentalists. Yet there remains an unfortunate need for science to push back against the lies that have led so many Americans to consistently deny that the theory of evolution explains the origins of the diversity of life on Earth – no creator necessary. Gallup polls, for example, from 1982 up until last year show that a very consistent proportion of nearly 50% of the population thinks that God created humans in their present form. This can at least be partially attributed to a failure of science education in the US, but science teachers are unfortunately up against the deceptive tactics of a handful of determined and unrelenting religious fundamentalists (predominantly Christians in this country, but the Muslim/Islamic community is in no way immune). There are even some science teachers at the elementary and high school levels who are part of this opposition, not to mention entire school boards, which makes science educators’ jobs even more difficult.
Evolution Happens 